i 18 i 

.8 

.C2 r 69 


FLM 

2014 

054790 



* 





^ *•••••* ^ c ® # . **•■»»• 4 f°°.. ^ **••••* ^ *\. *•*’•' f< 

L% v *1*.?- <0 v V *»•«* -0 


• ^ • j 

> r V* v * 


* e 9 *P A 

* &? • 
4 *& *, ' 


5 * Jy 

-Or «* 1* # o 

0 * j^yVw^ O 



• ■<#> .A' * 

\ •* 
* V %• ° 



% V A . 


* <&* J « 

v v G* ‘^^T7^*’vv 

A* , i * # * <£- q~ ,**% ^-, V b* # 

n>v* ’W ^ 


* 4* v \ • 


=2*. 


> • 




e jp-v g 

♦ r* * 


o, -o* .•Jir. '> v .*••- ^ .9* .vvi'« *> v s 



tj. ** •: 

V4 v 



vP 

*,*•* 6* ^> ♦TXT*’ A 

„ 0 * .•**. *b r 

♦ W 0 • o 

* ^o« 


*. •’* 
• *V*a * 



'oV 


: W : 

** A 'P. * 

* <■? ^Cc* • 

*, ....•* .o* % ' 

viP' ^ / ..J&J?, 

-r -/2^>-’ * 


’i- ♦%to^> _ »' »?• "*■ * •zg&narJ n *J\iess^v »?■' «* * 

& *CV * _0 <-t* <t,r o + ^cclr~ % * 

L> "> v' .>• •- ev .i? .»•/•', ^ V N .•••. *CV -tf 


A<3 

^ A^ »>Va % ^ c,<r t. > ,>Va % ^ c.^ «' 

_ .* ^ ^ •yw> V *Alm» ♦* % * 

o 0 o, c ° ^ »i l ^r 





’’fev* 



. % ™ r , Jp-V •ysH^.‘ %P ^ - 

,„. 0< \'"’"’ 0 /... ^’V,** • ■ ° ’".y,,. ,P\[""''' 0 ^°°... ,%-/*•• 

’• %-/ .-^K* 

• , ; WR* 


o . * 


vs * r *° 
c 

’ ++0* 



V 




V’ C> *> 

i * V<* ^v * j 



o ♦/ 7 V*« A ^ ’ G 1 

* o ^ ,w^4* % c° . 

- v* o^ ° ‘ 

* . ■ .-. . W v^, / y °* . ■27/M*' 

,v <cr O * ** _ 

- •-.." y o^. ♦...* A C 

^ a 1 v^/u*. 1 '^ a* v ‘^ps:* ^ «, v ri'i'. % J> 

^ «.v A * ffifflS^Sl • ^ at *4<\ 8JrA. p A * 

$ 5 ^ - 1 • aV^> aV-^ 4 . *. 

,v vr ^ •yw* A? V *.^&» £ % « 

•o % »vV« y ..»'•« <^a ,o v «•*•♦ **b .«•'■ .<■'•„ 

V • c^CVwKx*. *?MrjY?^rk~ ♦ C. r Cj t .r-^\T\ # "i5 .1*^ 4 -■*- * *® 





° si 

^o : 

- - . >°%. • 

O o. 0 ? <^. *T^^* Ar ^O •TtJv . 0° "V. '*» •- 

•'. V X‘^'. % . <{- vS / :i*i:.x y ^ *' 





■ \f :|»: *!• v :S®‘- V 1, • 

** A 


A ^P r . 

<p % t 


^v*. • k jfi ^VvT 4 A # © • »* «G^ 

V. ,, c ° V. C 


^ 4> *> 


o V 

r; 


' C • 

r- 

„4o* ‘ 


«feV* 
r ; j.°-v *-. 

IJ* 


Of 1 
<- 0 ^ • 


* » i 


• <^w >* 4-° "V * 

^ * , » 1 * £° .. ^ "• *T 

i, o 0 tr ,# ;Mm- % <? *>Va % <£* * v 

;• ^ v % v :/ ^4 v 'V* ^ ^ Vv.jraAv* 


• •- y. ’ - 4 y 


.v 


<* '••*** *&* 
L "‘ % p°* 

+i. rt : 






0 V o °JL* ♦ *o • •> • • * ' r, &. 


* kV «. 

I aj* o * 

•-o’ «** 


4 V 

0 ♦ 
*. ^ ^ .*■ 
Pvt, 


0*4 


0 ■ • 


.• *p^ : 

* 0 * 

•♦ . 0 *^ 




^ ... °* — 

■- w v J : 

■**“ ^p“^f j>%. '°WwW; J^V : Jl6ir* o>4. *. 



& A. , A , yl 

<» *'••»•* jF **5$$' A 1 

^ .’^4* % c° ®o a* .■•' 1 ''■• ■• 

■*t-. Z&Ur&izZfo* 0 * ««5h bB| < * «Jj *jt-iv/y**o • 

*«°- 


<■. * V * 


%/*** , *\> 0 ' ... . \ * ,,,< ’° ,. „ \^’**'’*** f° .. f ^ 

.* ^ *JB?** .^V ‘J&m: <&%. ''wm9: <?%> : .t 


& 


,4 


r O • 4 





A 1 ® w. # V --* 0 * & .% '*•* 0 ^ .... -♦. 

SgftflZ}^■. ^K. . P 0 .»W2S&* ”v.. . P °o 


































\V' 

w\ 


[The main object of this document is to present the failure 
of a Canadian policy based upon the hope of annexation, 
and the pressing need of a policy based upon protection and 
correlative reciprocity. It also epitomises the facts embraced 
in reports which I have had the honor to prepare for the 
Senate Committee on Interstate Commerce, the Senate Com¬ 
mittee on Relations with Canada, statements which I have 
prepared by request for officers of the Government, and letters 
to the New York Tribune and other newspapers. It is nr 
purpose to write a series of articles upon the subject of ct 
Canadian Relationships after the termination of the approach 
ing Presidential campaign. In the meantime, I shall be mot 
happy to receive criticisms upon, or suggestions in regard t, 
the various statements of fact and of opinion embraced i 
this document from any person to whom it may be sent.j 

JOSEPH NIMMO, Jr 

1831 F Street, Washington, D. C. 

May 13, 1893. 


OUR CANADIAN RELATIONSHIP" 





THE ANNEXATION DELUSION AND THE NI 
OF A NEW CANADIAN POLICY BASED UI 
PROTECTION AND CORRELATIVE R3 
PROCITY. 


By JOSEPH NIMMO, Jr. 


The cause of the cause is the cause of the thing caused :— 
So says a French political maxim, and it has abundant ex¬ 
emplification in persistent political influences which give 
tone and character to national life. An influence of this sort 
has from the beginning constituted a^redominant feature of 
pur Canadian relationships. 






2 


& 

i 

The Colonial Congress of 1774 earnestly 
Canadians to make common cause with the revolting Amer¬ 
ican Colonies, and the name Continental Congress adopted in 
1775 was expressive of a new-born faith that the appeal to 
arms would eventuate in continental domain. The sole ob¬ 
ject of the military expeditions led by Ethan Allen and Bene¬ 
dict Arnold into Canada during the year 1775 was to drive 
out the British soldiery and thus to enable the Canadians 
to join with their brethren at the South in the struggle 
already begun. To the Canadians, General Washington’s 
words were : “ The cause of America and of liberty is the 
cause of every American, whatever may be his religion or 
his descent. Come, then ; range yourselves under the 
standard of general liberty.” * 

The military expeditions referred to failed of their pur¬ 
pose, and the Congressional invitation of 1774 was declined 
lqfy the Canadians. But the faith which inspired that invita¬ 
tion and those expeditions has survived the vicissitudes of 
peace and of war. Even in the midst of the struggle for in¬ 
dependence the Americans inserted in their first National 
Constitution—the Articles of Confederation—a solicitous 
invitation to the Canadians to come and join the Union. 
This is found in Art. XI of that* instrument, which was 
signed July 9, 1778, “in the third year of the Independence 
of America,” a phase in itself indicative of the cherished 
hope of continental domain. Let it not be forgotten that 
our revolutionary sires entertained as large views and as 
earnest hopes regarding the geographical expansion of this 
country as are cherished to-day by the most ambitious of 
American citizens. More than eighty years before the great 
revolt Jonathan Sewall had written the inspiring lines— 

“ No pent-up Utica contracts our powers, 

For the whole boundless continent is ours.” 

This glowing sentiment is to-day emblazoned on the walls 
♦Bancroft’s History of the United States, Vol. IV, p. 298. 

P, 

8 JB, Hawley 

21Ja'03 




^ ■ locJ^OI G|\l(g5 


3 

of our House of Representatives, but it stands as an unful¬ 
filled prophecy. 

After the War for Independence was ended, Benjamin 
Franklin, who conducted the first negotiations for peace, 
proposed to Lord Shelburne, then Prime Minister of Eng¬ 
land, that Canada and Nova Scotia should be ceded to the 
United States, and he based this claim, among other con¬ 
siderations, upon the fact that it would “ prevent future 
wars.” * Shelburne declined Franklin’s proposition and 
Canada repelled it. 

At the close of the Revolutionary War about 25,000 per¬ 
sons in this country known as “ Tories,” who had maintained 
their loyalty to Great Britain, emigrated to Canada and the 
Provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, being lib¬ 
erally assisted in their exodus by the British Government. 
These people and their descendants have ever since been 
known as “ United Empire Loyalists”—a title still regarded 
in Canada as a designation of honor. The cherished loyalty 
of this class to the British Crown and their inherited preju¬ 
dice against the Government of the United States constitute 
to-day on the northern side of the national boundary line an 
apparently inseparable barrier to annexation, and, besides, 
seem to serve as an animus to those long continued aggres¬ 
sions upon American interests which characterize our Cana¬ 
dian relationships. 

It was believed by many that the war of 1812 would event¬ 
uate in annexation, but it did not, nor did it have any per¬ 
ceptible tendency in that direction. Again, when the Cana¬ 
dian insurrection of 1837 broke out, it was supposed that 
annexation was nigh—even at the door. But that revolt was 
speedily quelled, with annexation as far from realization as 
ever. The dream of annexation has, however, floated in the 
minds of the people of this country even to the present day, 
and its proponents have from time to time been able so to 

* See Leckey’s “England in the Eighteenth Century,” Yol. IV, pp. 244 
and 246. 


4 


influence the course of our British North American diplomacy 
as not only to compromise the interests of the United States, 
but to invite a course of Canadian aggression upon American 
interests up to a point at which patriotism and common sense 
seem to call a halt. 

In the year 1854 a so-called reciprocity treaty was con¬ 
cluded between the United States and Canada. The United 
States never before made so one-sided a bargain. It gave 
Canada free entry to the enormous and profitable markets of 
the United States in exchange for the privilege of the rela¬ 
tively insignificant Canadian market, a privilege, besides, in 
the nature of carrying coals to Newcastle. The idea of win¬ 
ning the Canadians to annexation by a taste of the commer¬ 
cial advantages which would accrue from such association 
helped to secure even this compromise of American interests. 
While the war of the rebellion was raging, and for two years 
afterward, the Canadians reaped a rich harvest from this 
treaty, the prices of all agricultural products being very high 
in our markets. But-during that very period Canadian sym¬ 
pathy was thrown against the preservation of the Union in 
the supposed interest of England. 

The recoil of our offended national pride led to the notice 
of the abrogation of the Treaty of 1854. It expired March 
IT, 1866. But the American annexationist was not even 
then squelched. On the contrary, the annexation mania 
broke out afresh and with unwonted vigor. It was predicted 
by its advocates that the loss of our markets would force 
the Canadians to seek admission into the Union, and great 
care was enjoined that nothing should occur to repel the 
supposed desires of our coveted neighbor. Mr. E. H. 
Derby, a special commissioner on Canadian relationships, 
reported to the Tariff Commission in 1866 that the maritime 
Provinces (Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward 
Island and Newfoundland) were about ready to join the 
Union, and a special agent of the Treasury Department in 
northern Minnesota reported that the bud of annexation in 


5 


Manitoba was about to burst into a full-blown flower. He 
also suggested measures whereby this consummation might 
be expedited ; while Mr. Banks, of Massachusetts, then a mem¬ 
ber of Congress, on July 2, 1866, introduced in Congress an 
elaborate bill, known as H. R. 754, XXXIXth Congress, First 
Session, for the admission of the States of Nova Scotia, New- 
Brunswick, Canada East and Canada West into the Union, 
and for the organization of the Territories of Selkirk, Sas¬ 
katchewan and Columbia. But these things only made the 
Canadians laugh. One year later, viz., on March 29, 1867, 
the British North American act, creating the Dominion of 
Canada, was enacted, and on the 1st of July following it was 
proclaimed. Mr. Erastus Wiman declared to a Senate 
Committee only two years ago that the abrogation of the 
Reciprocity Treaty in 1866 did not raise a whimper in all 
the British North American Provinces, and there is not the 
slightest doubt as to the correctness of his statement. 

Perhaps the wildest and most eccentric aberration of the 
annexation craze was exhibited about three years ago when 
a tandem team of liigh-steppers, composed of Mr. Erastus 
Wiman as leader and Mr. Benjamin Butter worth as wheel 
horse, hitched to the band-wagon of Commercial Union, with 
Professor Goldwin Smith as whip, made an international 
campaign, which was conducted with splendid ability and 
great vigor. The song sung in Canada was that commercial 
union would strengthen the British connection, and in the 
United States that it would be the forerunner of annexation. 
But the inherent absurdity of the idea of delegating the pro¬ 
tection of our customs revenues along our entire northern 
border to the Dominion Government, the absolute fiscal bar¬ 
rier to the adoption of such a scheme in Canada, and other 
inherent absurdities, soon led to the absolute and fiscal ex¬ 
tinction of the Commercial Union humbug. 

The very latest incident which has awakened the hopes and 
expectations of the American annexationist has just terminated 
in an election in the city of Toronto, where a person by the 


6 


name of Macdonald ran for member of the Ontario Legisla¬ 
ture on an out-and-out annexation platform. After the polls 
were closed it was discovered that out of a total vote of 
nearly 10,000, Macdonald had received 172 votes. It is 
presumable that out of 10,000 people selected at random in 
almost any country there may generally be found at least 
172 cranks. 

There is really no reason why sensible people in this 
country should longer refuse to accept the logic of events. 
And yet it appears safe to predict that the American 
annexationist will survive even this latest damper upon his 
hopes. 

The annexation policy in American politics has proved 
to be not only protean in form but Plioenix-like in character. 
It flourishes in peace and is rampageous in war; it predi¬ 
cates its conclusions as easily upon free trade as upon the 
most pronounced policy of protection. Like the ghost of 
Banquo, it will never down ; and yet all that the American 
annexationist has to show for his devotion to his pet senti¬ 
ment in the way of results up to the present day is the honor, 
the dignity, and the interest of his country compromised and 
invaded during a long course of outrageous Canadian aggres¬ 
sion and repudiation of manifest reciprocal obligations, even 
to the denial to Americans of the most appealing demands 
of a common humanity. The Canadians, however, are not 
alone to blame for all this. Let us confess it. It is instinct 
in human nature. Announce to another that he may despoil 
you and trample upon your rights at pleasure, and the proba¬ 
bilities are that he will do it. Certain it is that there has 
never been a time when a proper application for admission 
into the Union would have been denied to the Canadians, 
and it is not here assumed that such an application ought to 
meet denial. There are other phases of our Canadian rela¬ 
tionships to which I would briefly allude. 

1. The Dominion of Canada has become in all respects as 
independent of Great Britain with respect to her internal 


7 


affairs ancl her foreign commerce as is the United States. 
The Canadian British connection is sentimental rather than 
practical, and it is operative chiefly as a shield to Canadian 
aggression upon American interests. After two years of 
most unsatisfactory and confusing international correspond¬ 
ence Mr. Bayard expressed to SirjCharles Tupper under date 
of May 31, 1887, his disgust of the whole diplomatic farce 
in the following words : 

“ It is evident that the commercial intercourse between 
the inhabitants of Canada and the United States has grown 
into too vast proportions to be exposed much longer to this 
wordy triangular duel, and more direct and responsible 
methods should be resorted to.” 

2. A serious obstacle to mutually beneficial commercial re¬ 
lations between the two countries is interposed by the wide 
difference existing between the foreign commercial policies 
of the two countries. In the conduct of our foreign com¬ 
merce the Government of the United States is confined to 
the one arm of import duties,, whereas the Dominion Gov¬ 
ernment may use the right arm of import duties, the left arm 
of export duties, and, besides, the indefinable power of 
“ Orders in Council,” which seem to serve as a sort of kick¬ 
ing arrangement. The disadvantage at which we are placed 
in attempting to cope with such an opponent is apparent. 

3. Any sort of fair reciprocal trade relationship between 
Canada and the United States appears to be barred by the 
fact that the Dominion Government has become essentially 
a transportation corporation at rivalry with American trans¬ 
portation interests from Quoddy Head on the Atlantic to 
Vancouver on the Pacific. The Dominion Government owns 
and operates the system of Canadian canals, which cost about 
$52,000,000. It owns the Intercolonial Railway system, 
which cost over $50,000,000, and it is the financial promoter 
and the responsible backer of the Canadian Pacific Railway 
in all its outrageous aggressions upon American interests. 



8 


This latter statement is clearly proven by the following aids 
extended to the Canadian Pacific Kailway : 

(a) Loans and gifts of various sorts amounting to $215,- 

000,000. 

(b) Exemption from taxation, equal to a subvention of 
$700,000 a year. 

( c ) Protection against competing lines for twenty years. 

(d) An annual subvention of the Canadian Pacific line 
through the State of Maine of $186,000 a year. 

(e) A subsidy to a steam line between Vancouver and China 
and Japan of $300,000 a year, and a steamer subsklv promised 
on the Atlantic of $500,000 a year. 

(/) An act of the Canadian Parliament enabling and incit¬ 
ing Canadian railroads to encroach upon American transpor¬ 
tation interests, which renders the beneficial operation of our 
Interstate Commerce Act impossible. This fact has been 
clearly set forth by our Interstate Commerce Commission. 

The various governmental aids to the Canadian Pacific 
Kailway and its connecting steamer lines amount to a sub¬ 
vention of fully $12,000,000 a year. This operates as a direct 
annual discrimination to that amount against American sea¬ 
ports and American transportation interests on the land and 
on the sea. 

Apparently the most absurd feature of this whole subject 
of Canadian Pacific Railway encroachment consists in our 
failure to discriminate between transportation on the eastern 
side of the continent, where conditions of interjecting terri¬ 
tory and climatic causes render reciprocal transportation 
arrangements mutually beneficial, and transportation on the 
western side of the continent, where no such reciprocal con¬ 
ditions exist, and where Canadian subsidized competition 
on the land and on the sea is nothing more nor less than 
Canadian aggression upon American commercial interests. 
Mr. Windom, Secretary of the Treasury, had just come to a 
realization of this outrageous encroachment upon American 
interests at the close of his life, and he proclaimed the fact with 


9 


great emphasis and patriotic fervor in the speech delivered 
a few moments before his tragic death. 

And now let us turn to the absurd and compromising 
record of Canadian aggressions upon American interests, the 
unmistakable fruitage of the carefully nursed policy of 
annexation on our side of the line, and of the long and 
wearisome “ wordy triangular duel,” spoken of by Mr. 
Bayard, which has rendered our Canadian diplomacy utterly 
senseless and misleading. 

First. A discrimination of 18 cents a ton on the Canadian 
canals is maintained in favor of Montreal as against New 
York, contrary to the provisions of the Treaty of Washing¬ 
ton. 

Second. Discriminating entrance and clearance fees are 
imposed upon American vessels in Canadian ports contrary 
to the Treaty of Washington. 

Third. The Dominion Government refuses to allow Ameri¬ 
can citizens to go to the relief of American vessels and their 
crews when wrecked in Canadian waters. 

Fourth. A discriminating duty of 20 per cent, is imposed 
by Canada on silver coin of the United States. 

Fifth. Canadian Pacific discriminations established by the 
Dominion Government against American railroads and 
American ships, as already described, embrace a subvention 
of $12,000,000 a year, and, besides, that government openly 
incites commercial aggression through violation of the pro¬ 
visions of our Insterstate Commerce Act. 

Sixth. Canada maintains a position on the fishery ques¬ 
tion to-day which expressed itself in acts characterized 
by Daniel Manning, when Secretary of the Treasury, as 
“ acts of barbarism fit only for savages.” American fisher¬ 
men escape such treatment to-day only under the terms of 
modus vive7idi, which the Hon. Thomas Reed has properly 
characterized as “ a mode of dying.” 

Seventh. Canada imposes a discriminating duty of 10 per 
cent, on tea and coffee “ when imported from the United 
States” in the interest of the Canadian Pacific Railway. 




10 


Eighth. The Dominion Government refuses to extend the 
privilege of copyright to American authors after the United 
States had extended such privilege to Canadian authors, and 
after the British Government had notified the United States 
that Canada had acceded to the reciprocal arrangement. 
This fact was recently discovered by Mr. Blaine. 

Ninth. The Dominion Government is conniving at the 
practice of importing Chinese and running them across our 
border contrary to our laws. Sir John McDonald gloried in 
this trick played upon the United States. 

Tenth. The Dominion Government is using all her power 
to throw the full force of British diplomacy and military in¬ 
fluence in favor of Canadian depredations upon our sealing 
interests in Behring Sea, which were the unquestioned and 
exclusive possession of Bussia and the United States for a 
hundred years, and which Canadians now poach upon as 
robbers and destroyers. 

Other attempts have been made by the Dominion Govern - 
ment, or with its sanction, to depredate upon American in¬ 
terests, but of so barefaced and aggressive a character that, 
when detected, they were discontinued for fear of retaliation 
by the long-suffering and patient “ States.” 

With the British keen eye to business in politics, the 
Canadians discovered years ago that aggression upon Amer¬ 
ican interests pays better than annexation to the United 
States. 

But hopefully a remedy has been discovered for all this 
trouble. The policy of protection to American interests, 
supplemented by the policy of reciprocity in all cases where 
American interests will thereby be promoted, seems to for¬ 
mulate the future commercial policy of the United States 
toward all countries, and to furnish the key to the adjust¬ 
ment of our Canadian relationship on the lines of a true 
Americanism. The splendid success of this policy in so far as 
it has become operative in the countries and colonies to the 
south of us is indicated by the fact that our exports to Cuba 


11 


increased from $7,981,888 during the seven months ending 
March 31, 1891, to $11,607,438 during the seven months 
ending March 31, 1892, and by many other equally gratify¬ 
ing results. 

The Dominion Government has, however, for years been 
forcing this identical policy into the conduct of our Canadian 
relationship, but on exceedingly hard lines. She has pro¬ 
tected her fisheries against American competition, in the 
language of Daniel Manning, by “ acts of barbarism fit only 
for savages,” and by the refusal of commercial privilege 
freely accorded by the United States to the people of 
Canada, and then she has turned upon us with the insulting 
offer of partial exemption from such outrage in exchange for 
the privilege of importing Canadian fish into our ports free 
of duty. Such privilege would be exceedingly detrimental 
to our maritime interests, which we are now so earnestly 
trying to promote. Besides, all along our northern border 
line the Dominion Government maintains a policy character¬ 
ized by inhumanity and outrageous aggression upon the 
commercial and transportation interests of this country, all 
of which measures, protective and enabling toward Canadian 
interests, are maintained by the Dominion Government as a 
coigne of vantage in the establishment of any sort of recip¬ 
rocal relations which even the most ardent commercial 
unionist in Canada could possibly offer to the United States. 

Apparently the true course for this country now to pursue 
is at once to formulate and enforce a pronounced policy of 
protection to American interests from the Banks of Newfound¬ 
land to the Straits of San Juan de Fuca, and to maintain 
such protection as the essential condition to a reciprocity 
which would at once defend the honor and protect the commer¬ 
cial, industrial, and transportation interests of the United 
States against further Canadian outrage, aggression, and in¬ 
sult. 

It is believed that the people of this country are at last 
beginning t<^ view the whole subject of our Canadian relation- 


12 


ship in its true light. Mr. Windom’s last speech, and the 
fact that the Canadian Commissioners who recently came to 
Washington w r ere confronted with the full record of Canadian 
encroachment upon American interests, indicate that the 
present Administration is awake to the situation. Hopefully 
wise and just conclusions will no longer be prevented by the 
dream of annexation or by the confusion of a diplomatic 
“ wordy triangular duel.” The settlement of the Behring 
Sea affair cannot be permitted to end the whole matter of 
adjusting our Canadian relationships. Respect for our dignity 
as a great Nation and a proper regard for our vast commer¬ 
cial interests forbid it. Let us recur to the farewell injunc¬ 
tions of George Washington against undue partiality for any 
Nation, especially in our commercial relations. 

It will be discreditable to the Republican party if it fails 
to incorporate protection against every form of Canadian en¬ 
croachment upon American interests into its platform for the 
campaign of 1892, and it will be discreditable to the country 
if such a policy is not fully sustained by the people. 

JOSEPH NIMMO, Jr. 

Washington, May 13, 1892. 


* 


X63 







f: 



c°*wv * * ■ v • * >°. . ■ • .....<* • 

o /tv -'.^-V ; i • *>* A * *NSvoX|rm* -4^ ♦/f^wvx A • ’▼' 



t> •Vlvcsss* ^ * < *ysw&2 ^ ^ <y «* % \ 

V^V % W*'\# V^*> V^V 

I*' V A ; V JSS^ ^ #»: \/ :$ 


«* f ^ 

A°^ \ a *'... 

f cr • •ir«.*fe 

o 


A/ <5* ° 




« aV*\ © t// 

* .♦* > « y 
<* ' 

*b V* 4 


A & 

* <§> ^ 

* A ^ k *0 f ( • .ft- ♦. 

^ % *'■'*♦ ^ r o^ # #, s **b 

? ;jgf^*. %, 0 < ° 

• a? q V # *?S$>\^ ‘V^ 7 ’’ A° J % * 

c\ 4 o^ i«**^ v 0- ., • 0 ^ a? ,♦., v>. * ,v 

\ * / :&&• ♦♦ ♦♦ -M \ / .*&&. %, ^ v /* 




v V** 

♦ 4>* % • 





<•9^ - 

. ‘ ,** \ * 


r- v m-. v * \/m:\/$ 


<•9^ 

,v ^ * 


** 4^ ° 


S «-P, 


5 <!n 




* 

o 


V^> VW ^W ^" 
1° °° ^ ° 0 ^ ^ *\ 


>o 

\ "’ J .XX, % - 

k: *?f :MBm' «** 

* . 4 ^ * , 4 ^ ^ 

A # o • * * «Cr % 

* *%. * 



<4* °^. *■«•’• 'V *.T.» .-^ 

v °' sy %**yL'+ *> A 

^ .4V£ ^ ^ .: 


;* SX ■•? 



ERT 
^CHNC 

CrantvlHt Pa 
Sept—Oct 1985 

-e Qu*W> bound 



* ^ 

* A **v 

* ' i ^p- • 

o • ft * «G r C) ♦ 


• ••* .A <\ ’«• » * <VJ o. w 

t - L JJ« ■** .0^ .“JL*- *0 

<N ♦ rjr V/ 

4U.J ' 



**'-** A® ^ * • 






/ ^ ^ . 

..•■ v f " 

v C' *0 ♦• 

•- \A ^ *'• 










